Tribunal to start hearing evidence against CJ Twomey today05-June-2018The tribunal set up by the Constitutional Appointments Authority to inquire into certain complaints that the authority believes raised issues of misbehaviour on the part of Chief Justice, Dr Mathilda Twomey, will today (Tuesday) start hearing evidence.

06-June-2018Set up by the Constitutional Appointment Authority to investigate complaints of misbehaviour by Chief Justice Mathilda Twomey, the tribunal will start hearing evidence on Monday July 30.CJ Twomey is being represented by lawyers Pesi Pardiwalla, Kieran Shah and Francis Chang Sam.The tribunal is composed of Judge Michael Adams QC as the president, Judge John Raymond Murphy and Judge Olufunmilayo Atilade as members.In its first session yesterday at the ex-National http://www.nation.sc/article.html?id=259151

Revised Civil Code of Seychelles scrutinised before being tabled to the House

12-June-2018

The proposals of a revised civil code of Seychelles aimed at replacing the Civil Code of Seychelles Act 1975 was discussed during a working session held last week.This was between the Bills Committee of the National Assembly chaired by Bernard Georges, the civil code revision committee chaired by Chief Justice Mathilda Twomey and the Vice-President of the Republic, Vincent Meriton, who will be proposing the Bill to the House.http://www.nation.sc/article.html?id=259227

Gary Tall‎ to Lalyans pour tou Seselwa39 mins · Kalawan, la ou bred!The Constitutional Court has dismissed Karunakaran's case against the previous CAA.The ruling was unanimous by three judges .This ruling is a kick in the arse for Karunakaran and the present CAA and a victory for James Alix Michel and the previous CAA.More details will follow during the day .Many thanks for your support and best wishes for a great day .PS Karunakaran may still appeal to the Appeals Court.

The second day of hearing evidence from witnesses continues this morning at 10am at National House. This follows yesterday’s intense questioning from the Tribunal into allegations made by Judge Durai Karunakaran concerning Chief Justice Mathilda Twomey’s actions.

by S. Marivel

The air was tense during yesterday's Tribunal of Inquiry as its members conducted direct questioning of witnesses. Wasting no time on frivolous or emotional details, they strived to boil their questions down to the legality of actions taken by Chief Justice Mathilda Twomey to determine whether the claims against her are viable for removal from office.

The allegations themselves are serious; abuse of authority of office, destruction of evidence, making public the report of the Tribunal of Inquiry into the conduct of Judge Karunakaran, and the institution of the Tribunal of Inquiry.These were presented by Judge Karunakaran himself as a witness. It was alleged that the four points are the basis for the Chief Justice’s “misconduct” which could lead to her removal from office.

The Tribunal insists that all statements made in the hearings do not necessarily point to a conclusion, and that all substantial answers and decisions will be communicated at the end of the hearing period through their report. All judgement should be suspended until then.

"This Tribunal operates completely independently and doesn’t start from any points raised by the Constitutional Appointments Authority, nor does it take it for granted that any side is right. Nothing that has been said is the basis for the appointment of this Tribunal, nor its conclusions. This is simply the starting point for an investigation,” the Tribunal President Hon. Michael Adams, QC, points out.

Tough questioning from the Tribunal aimed to determine the legality of these points, and whether there is substantial evidence to support it.

The alleged abuse of authority emanates from a claim from Judge Karunakaran that the Chief Justice blocked his email access the day he was suspended in October 2016. He says he was to submit all files and vacate the premises immediately, but requested more time to gather his belongings, which was granted.

The Tribunal did question why Judge Karunakaran found this action “legally wrong”, pointing out that so far the only thing that can be found with respects to this event is that while the event might have been upsetting, the action itself was not illegal. Details get murkier when it comes to emails Judge Karunakaran alleges were also deleted from his inbox, apparently a day before he was suspended. More evidence has been requested from the Tribunal to ascertain the contents of the emails themselves, as Judge Karunakaran maintains that they were defamatory to his name but those presented as evidence yesterday did not contain any such content or point to any foul play. This will be further investigated in today’s hearing.

In the instance of Dr. Twomey making public the report of the Tribunal of Inquiry into the conduct of Judge Karunakaran, the Tribunal questioned why it had to be secretive in the first place given that the inquiry process was done publicly. This was also the first time such as Tribunal was set up and therefore there are no precedents to refer to.

The allegation of ‘destruction of evidence’ was regarding the case of François Octobre v The Republic, where he claimed damages due to negligence of doctors and staff of the Seychelles Hospital in 2002. The case dragged on until 2016, and Judge Karunakaran was not able to pronounce a judgement due to him being suspended.

Dr. Twomey had a new hearing for the case and made a judgement. The Tribunal took note that all was done legally; all parties had agreed to a new hearing, submissions were made, and she made a new judgement in the case.

However, no conclusions to that matter have been drawn yet.Mr. Octobre was also questioned briefly as a witness in the case with the help of interpreter Yvonne Hoareau.

It is still unclear what will ensue of this entire debacle, as the Tribunal is only beginning its investigation and gathering different bits of the story. More witnesses are expected today to aid in clarity.

The Tribunal did stress that there are “political and social issues in a small country like this, but we are not going to engage in these matters”, explaining that their sole purpose is to remain objective and find legal evidence that would cause the Chief Justice to be removed from office or not.

“This is why an independent Tribunal has been appointed from outside the country to lead this investigation,” Hon. Adams, QC notes.

Durai Karunakaran was this week convicted of contempt of court and has been fined R5,000.

Failing payment of the R5,000, he will serve seven days’ in prison. He has been given one month to pay the fine.

The contempt arose on March 27, 2018 during a constitutional hearing in his case against the appointment of the tribunal to inquire into his conduct.

The Constitutional court case filed by lawyer Philippe Boullé against members of the tribunal set up to investigate alleged misconduct by Judge Karunakaran, was adjourned because of an alleged contempt of court by the same Mr Karunakaran, an incident in which he supposedly abused Counsel for the Attorney General in open court.

Mr Karunakaran left his seat during the sitting and walked towards the Counsel for the Attorney General and spoke to him. Seconds later the counsel said Mr Karunakaran had insulted him and the presiding judge Seegobin Nundoo even asked Mr Karunakaran to apologise but he refused. As a result, the presiding judge had to adjourn the session. The other two judges working on this case were Laura Pillay and Melchior Vidot.

Judge Karunakaran was suspended in October 2016 by former President James Michel and his suspension came as a result of the decision of the Constitutional Appointments Authority to refer him to a tribunal of inquiry to investigate his professional conduct.

Justice Karunakaran filed a case against the former CAA, saying that he did not get a chance to be heard after he was suspended.

According to Article 134 of the Seychelles Constitution, a justice of appeal or judge may be removed from office only for inability to perform the functions of the office, whether arising from infirmity of body or mind, or from any other cause and for misbehaviour.

Comment - Here everybody paying respect and homage to the Statue of Mahatma Gandhi, his long road to leading his country. Within the same spirit to add the fact of our French ancestral who colonized India just like the British the concept of that SIROP program how/the state of India politic and economy before that SIROP program was written the whole world knew and suddenly, that program made available the WWW and how this gave Indian a mega boost in promoting its many interests in the world - the Indian community was bankrupt before that SIROP program was written and what happen after, no credit is given to that program and those who were responsible.

09-November-2018In the following interview, the Seychelles NATION speaks to 30-year-old Natasha Burian, a young magistrate in the Seychelles Judiciary, to learn more about her thoughts on current issues, how she is personally contributing to our society, Mrs Burian, a young Magistrate in the Seychelles Judiciary and her advice to other young people in the country.http://www.nation.sc/article.html?id=261137